An Evaluation of the Robertson-Stiff Model Describing Rheological Properties of Drilling Fluids and Cement Slurries

Abstract

This paper evaluates the Robertson-Stiff rheological model for cement slurries and drilling muds. The model is compared with the Herschel-Bulkley model and is found to be an improved model for cement slurries. The Robertson-Stiff equations for volumetric flow rates in narrow annuli and tubes are shown to be limited to fluids with no yield stress. This paper develops more general equations that include the Robertson-Stiff results as special cases. Introduction In a recent paper, Robertson and Stiff presented a new model for describing the rheological behavior of drilling fluids and cement slurries. The principal advantages claimed for this model areit provides better fits of rheological data than other three-constant viscous models, andit gives explicit relations for the velocity fields, wall shear rates, and flow-rate/pressure-drop relations for flow in tubes and annuli. The latter advantage is not possible with comparable models such as the possible with comparable models such as the Herschel-Bulkley model. In this paper we provide an independent evaluation of the model with regard to these characteristics. First, we checked the accuracy of the model in fitting cement-slurry data and found that it does provide a good match to the experimental data. Fig. provide a good match to the experimental data. Fig. 1 shows the experimental data for a cement slurry along with fitting curves for the Robertson-Stiff and Herschel-Bulkley models. It can be seen that the Robertson-Stiff model is somewhat superior to the Herschel-Bulkley model in representing the data. This is also true in Fig. 2, which represents results for a different cement slurry of higher yield. Here again, the performance of the Robertson-Stiff model is somewhat better. Based on these observations, as well as others not presented here, we agree with the authors that their model is an improved model for cement slurries. With regard to the claim that the model provides explicit relations for the wall shear rate and pressure-drop/flow-rate relation, we have found pressure-drop/flow-rate relation, we have found certain errors in the Robertson-Stiff analysis that invalidate this claim and make their final equations applicable only in certain special cases. The basic error in their paper is that Robertson and Stiff overlooked the existence of a plug flow region in the center of the pipe or narrow annulus. Because of this, the equations derived are strictly valid only for the case of fluids with zero yield stress. Since most drilling fluids and cement slurries show some finite yield stress, the equations provided by Robertson and Stiff are of limited provided by Robertson and Stiff are of limited application. In the remainder of this paper we derive the correct relations for the model; the Robertson-Stiff relations appear as special cases. SPEJ P. 97

Rheological behavior and temperature dependency study of Saraline-based super lightweight completion fluid

“…In a number of studies (Beirute and Flumerfelt, 1977;Khataniar et al, 1994;Gücüyener and Mehmetoğlu, 1996;Al-Zahrani, 1997;Bailey andWeir, 1998 Kelessidis andMaglione, 2006;Park and Song, 2010), these four models have widely been used in the upstream oil and gas application, such as in the prediction of completion fluids, drilling fluids, and cement slurries. From the results, shown in Table 5, it is apparent that these four models gave a good reliable prediction for Saraline-based fluids.…”

Real-Time Evaluation of Hole-Cleaning Conditions With a Transient Cuttings-Transport Model

“…A typical rheological model that describes such liquids satisfactorily is that of Herschel and Bulkley (s ¼ s 0 þ K _ c n , with s 0 the yield stress, K the consistency index, and n the flow-behavior index), but it yields mathematical formulations for the fluid flow in pipes and annuli that are not readily solvable. However, a rheological formulation has been proposed (Robertson and Stiff 1976) that fits well with drilling-fluid rheometer measurements (see the measurements made by Beirute and Flumerfelt 1977). This allows for analytical expressions of the shear rate, and solvable mathematical formulations of the pressure loss in laminar flow inside a tube or a concentric annulus (Whittaker 1985), which, in turn, help improve the computational efficiency of algorithms that are used for transient-flow modeling.…”

A Generalized and Consistent Pressure Drop and Flow Regime Transition Model for Drilling Hydraulics

“…8 Only very few rheological models have gained any widespread acceptance within the petroleum industry, the two most common being the Bingham plastic 9 and the power law ͑sometimes referred to as the Ostwald-de Waele model, 10,11 although one similarly constructed was presented independently by Farrow and Lowe 12 at the same time͒. To a lesser extent, the models of Casson, 13 Herschel-Bulkley 14 and Robertson-Stiff 15,16 are also employed. The popularity of these models can be explained by the tractable form of their respective laminar flow functions 17 and the ease with which model parameters may be estimated.…”